rshdunlop wrote:Perhaps because the people being searched are not the people carrying knives?
[ Post made via Mobile Device ]
Is this because the police have their hands tied, and have to stop and search an equal amount of people from all walks of life? Ie 50 year old men/woman as well as 16+males/females? at the end of the day, stop and search should be directed towards whoever is the most likely to carry a weapon,and correct me if I,m wrong (as I'm sure someone will) but wouldn't this group more than likely be young people?
It was comfortable,cosy,to watch,I thought all police were like that in the 60s,I got lost when I was 10-11 years old,and they went all out to find me,I always saw the good in them, it was the way I was brought up, do no wrong and no need to fear.
Yes you could trust George and all his colleagues.
#
Got a bit of a shock when those brash newcomers from Newtown came on the scene in the mid 60's , first time we heard Brian Blessed.
Eagle wrote:Yes things seemed to straight forward in those days. You knew who the badies were and they held their hands up when nicked by George and Serg Flint.
No human rights palava .
They may have done in those days on the Telly, but they didn't at Braybrook Street.
Maybe it would be interesting to know how many "suspects in stop and search are actually found to be carrying knives??
it could possibly indicate how successful it is? I heard on the radio that there would be an automatic sentence of 5 years for anybody caught carrying a knife...if this were the case and figures were regularly publisised maybe it would serve as more of a deterent?
I know campbell committed the crime of stabbing one victim 5 times including once to the chest and another victim once to the chest...these were 2 young men travelling on the same bus and got into abit of a row...campbell pleaded guilty to both offences in 2004...he was released in 2008...the fact that he had a knife in his bag when he again got into an argument and stabbed 2 men, proves that this kind of sentence does not act as a deterent.....you would expect just the fact he had a knife would lead to a longer sentence than the one served for a crime which could have taken 2 lives.I believe enforcing the minimum sentence for carrying a knife may be the best way to prevent the more serious crime of using the knife for threat , injury or loss of life .
These people who try to kill someone ( and if you stab someone then you trying to kill them no mistake) should automatically serve a sentence for life, life should mean life not just a few years then out to do it again!
I,m fed up with the idiots who want to rehabilitate them,
think they can sort out their heads,
make them a better person,how often does it happen against how often it doesn't
4 years is bloody ridiculous. Surely deliberately stabbing someone in the chest should count as attempted murder... a 4 year term doesn't tally with any of this:
I hope this time,if he ever gets out he'll be too old to be a threat to anyone.with offences that that could add up to 2 x life sentences and minimum 5 years for carrying the knife in the first place and a repeat offender,it should be a very heafty sentence.
Jac wrote:I hope this time,if he ever gets out he'll be too old to be a threat to anyone.with offences that that could add up to 2 x life sentences and minimum 5 years for carrying the knife in the first place and a repeat offender,it should be a very heafty sentence.
A lot of the problem is with senile old judges being too lenient.
....I must stand up for the judge on THIS occassion...he was very stern when speaking to Campbell saying he considers him to be a danger to the public and his sentence will reflect this...when making his comendation for bravery to 2 of the witnesses who had intervened(one being stabbed himself)said that without this intervention he has no doubt that the first victims injurys would have been much worse and possibly fatel ! so i do believe he will do every thing in his power to make sure he serves along time......i think the short sentence in the other case was down to the fact that campbell admittedthe offences at an early stage which entitled him to lenientcy,(a fact which he tried to use in his defense saying " i admitted it last time)whereas this time evidence of bad character was bought in .
